We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Review
Intrapartum cesarean delivery after successful external cephalic version: a meta-analysis.
Obstetrics and Gynecology 2004 July
OBJECTIVE: We sought to estimate whether the risk of intrapartum cesarean delivery is higher in pregnancies after successful external cephalic version.
DATA SOURCES: We searched the MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases to identify relevant studies. Abstracts of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Annual Clinical Meeting and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Annual Meeting were searched by hand.
STUDY SELECTION: Studies published between 1980 and 2002 that provided data allowing us to estimate the cesarean rate in both pregnancies after successful version and spontaneous cephalic-presenting pregnancies were selected.
TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) between the 2 compared groups were calculated. We used a meta-analysis to assess the heterogeneity of the studies and to combine the results from the included studies. Six eligible studies were identified. The cesarean rate was 27.6% in pregnancies after successful version and 12.5% in cephalic-presenting pregnancies. The combined RR and 95% CI was 2.04 (1.43-2.91). The increased cesarean rate in pregnancies after successful version was accounted for primarily by a higher incidence of emergency cesarean delivery for dystocia and fetal distress; the RR (95% CI) for these 2 events was 2.19 (1.38-3.48) and 2.10 (1.18-3.75), respectively.
CONCLUSION: The intrapartum cesarean delivery rate after successful version is 2 times that in pregnancies where there is spontaneous cephalic presentation. Pregnancies after successful version should not be considered the same as a normal pregnancy.
DATA SOURCES: We searched the MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases to identify relevant studies. Abstracts of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Annual Clinical Meeting and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Annual Meeting were searched by hand.
STUDY SELECTION: Studies published between 1980 and 2002 that provided data allowing us to estimate the cesarean rate in both pregnancies after successful version and spontaneous cephalic-presenting pregnancies were selected.
TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) between the 2 compared groups were calculated. We used a meta-analysis to assess the heterogeneity of the studies and to combine the results from the included studies. Six eligible studies were identified. The cesarean rate was 27.6% in pregnancies after successful version and 12.5% in cephalic-presenting pregnancies. The combined RR and 95% CI was 2.04 (1.43-2.91). The increased cesarean rate in pregnancies after successful version was accounted for primarily by a higher incidence of emergency cesarean delivery for dystocia and fetal distress; the RR (95% CI) for these 2 events was 2.19 (1.38-3.48) and 2.10 (1.18-3.75), respectively.
CONCLUSION: The intrapartum cesarean delivery rate after successful version is 2 times that in pregnancies where there is spontaneous cephalic presentation. Pregnancies after successful version should not be considered the same as a normal pregnancy.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app